Diana-2 - master-piece or flop?

At 08:00 19 June 2007, Dan G wrote:

Quite apart from that though Bill is absolutely right.
The older
German manufacturers are being left behind by other
companies across
the board. It's not suprising nor unusual that people
try and rubbish
threats to their favourite brands.


Dan

Eh?? It is great to see excellent new designs and
manufacturers such as the Diana, Antares, HpH Shark
and Jonkers but to say that 'the older German manufacturers
are being left behind by other companies across the
board' is a bit OTT.

Open Class: Who is beating the ASW22 and Nimbus 4?
!8m class: The ASG 29 is being left behind?
Standard Class: Anything better than the Discus 2A?
15m Class: The Diana-2 is a fascinating project and
elements of it may have a big effect on the future
of glider construction. The light weight allows a
very high aspect ratio and high performance. However
(if you want to buy into a fading class) is it yet
a safe place to put your own money rather than in an
ASW 27/Ventus 2?

John Galloway

On Jun 19, 2:25 pm, John Galloway wrote:

Eh?? It is great to see excellent new designs and
manufacturers such as the Diana, Antares, HpH Shark
and Jonkers but to say that 'the older German manufacturers
are being left behind by other companies across the
board' is a bit OTT.

Open Class: Who is beating the ASW22 and Nimbus 4?

Eta and EB28

18m class: The ASG 29 is being left behind?

304S, Antares 18 and JS1

Standard Class: Anything better than the Discus 2A?

Nope, but there's so many LS8s knocking around now - which are 99% as
good unless you live in an area where very strong conditions are the
norm - I'd be suprised if many D2s are still being sold

15m Class: The Diana-2 is a fascinating project and
elements of it may have a big effect on the future
of glider construction. The light weight allows a
very high aspect ratio and high performance. However
(if you want to buy into a fading class) is it yet
a safe place to put your own money rather than in an
ASW 27/Ventus 2?

Add in 15m version of 304S too. Yes, I expect these newer designs
which draw upon the great advances in computing power in the last few
years to outperform old designs.


Dan

Add in 15m version of 304S too. Yes, I expect these newer designs
which draw upon the great advances in computing power in the last few
years to outperform old designs.

The HpH factory is not making the 304S in 15m. And no one has been
able to explain to me why the 18m version is flying with a more
favorable handicap than older designs.

2NO (who had high hopes for the 304S)

not completely true......The 18m is most in demand from all manufacturers
HpH has simply had no orders for 15M 304S.....the plan today is to offer the
304s as 18 and offer 20m optional wingtips
The proposed 304SE (15m version only) is still planned, but it will not be a
convertible glider...blood and guts 15M only
New brochure is on my website http://www.wingsandwheels.com/pdf/Specs_E.pdf
tim
Please visit the Wings & Wheels website at www.wingsandwheels.com

"Tuno" wrote in message
ups.com...
Add in 15m version of 304S too. Yes, I expect these newer designs
which draw upon the great advances in computing power in the last few
years to outperform old designs.

The HpH factory is not making the 304S in 15m. And no one has been
able to explain to me why the 18m version is flying with a more
favorable handicap than older designs.

2NO (who had high hopes for the 304S)

Tim: I have correspondence from HpH stating that they are not making
the 304S in 15m, and have no plans to, and that that the 304SE is a
"drawing only". Ergo, my original statement is completely
true(assuming of course that the factory have not changed their mind).

2NO (Gollywomper II on order)

On 19 Jun, 14:25, John Galloway wrote:

Open Class: Who is beating the ASW22 and Nimbus 4?

It's intriguing that such old designs have survived so long. The
Nimbus 4 came out in 1990 and the ASW-22 in 1981. I wonder if it's
because the Open Class market is too small to justify much investment?
It would be interesting to speculate on what the big stuff would be
doing now if it had benefitted from the R&D which has gone into 15m
and 18m machines.

Ian

Maybe the answer will be the ASH30 Mi...

"Ian" wrote in message
oups.com...
On 19 Jun, 14:25, John Galloway wrote:

Open Class: Who is beating the ASW22 and Nimbus 4?

It's intriguing that such old designs have survived so long. The
Nimbus 4 came out in 1990 and the ASW-22 in 1981. I wonder if it's
because the Open Class market is too small to justify much investment?
It would be interesting to speculate on what the big stuff would be
doing now if it had benefitted from the R&D which has gone into 15m
and 18m machines.

Ian

On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:23:54 +0200, "Bert Willing"
wrote:

Maybe the answer will be the ASH30 Mi...

... or the Concordia with the official design L/D of 80.


Bye
Andreas

Schleicher are developing the ASH 30 Mi which will have 26.5 M
wingspan and has better high speed creuise, though the wing loading is
still not as high as say 15 or 18 m ships.

The EB28 is already flying and has better performance than the ASH
25.

I find it intriguing that the Diana-2 has such high performance at low
speeds, that it matches the 18m ships in slow max LD glide and
probably kills them heavily ballasted at high speeds. It's probably
better than any open ship loaded at high speed as well.

One of the reasons is because it can load it's wings to 58KG per SQ M
- which is higher than any ship I am aware of.

Until other manufacturers go to sparless wings, the Diana-2 will
retain this advantage, IMHO.

I found it interesting to read recently that the very first glass ship
- the Phoenix - was also a sparless design and was light as a feather
as well. In those days, it was thought that the better the ship
climbed the faster it went cross country. The Phoenix never had any
structural issues and was a sound design.

So really, the Diana-2 is just back to the beginning and nothing new.
Wish I could afford one..............in my dreams I can..........

tommytoyz wrote:


So really, the Diana-2 is just back to the beginning and nothing new.
Wish I could afford one..............in my dreams I can..........
I think they're just beautiful in their sorta-weird way. With that tiny boom
and the kinda clunky looking empennage and the ellipse wing.
It really is a sexy machine.
My problem is two-fold. Not enough dough to spend right now... and at 6'3"
and 230#, they say I would need some olive oil and a shoehorn to get in and
outtta one. O_o

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...aring/200706/1